[Football] Mounie red card..(Hudds lodge - and lose - appeal)

Murray 17 said:

I, too, have been watching football for 40+ years.

I agree, both this season were technically reds. I also don't think Stephens should have been sent off against 'boro because the gash was caused by Ramirez kicking and his shin striking the bottom of Stephen's boot. If a player throws his head at someone's elbow, it is their own fault, so to speak.

The dirty tackles of the 70s and 80s needed to be eradicated, and have.

However, penalties are now awarded if there's a clean tackle, where the ball is won, but the player is taken off his feet.

My general point is that the sanitising of the game has made for many more cards, players being banned for long periods, for quite frankly what reason?

Stephens and Mounie will each miss 3 games - completely out of proportion to what they've done.

Click to expand...

dazzer6666 said:

I do - I think he was snidely trying to leave a bit on Bissouma but got spotted.

Click to expand...

drew said:

So if a player dangerously and recklessly flies in and in one case takes out the knee of the opponent it's a red card but if with the exact same tackle but this time the opponent just jumps out of the way just in time it's not! In both cases, the action of the player making the tackle is exactly the same. Bit like saying you don't charge someone with drink driving unless they actually hit something!! It's nonsensical.

Click to expand...

drew said:

So if a player dangerously and recklessly flies in and in one case takes out the knee of the opponent it's a red card but if with the exact same tackle but this time the opponent just jumps out of the way just in time it's not! In both cases, the action of the player making the tackle is exactly the same. Bit like saying you don't charge someone with drink driving unless they actually hit something!! It's nonsensical.

Click to expand...

Kalimantan Gull said:

OK, so this 'intent' thing... I struggle to see how intent is taken away, both in theory and in practice. Take two stamping incidents of recent vintage, Hemed on the Newcastle player and Barton on Kayal. In bioh cases, if the player intentionally stamped on the guy on the ground, red card all day long. But if he didn't mean it, he just landed awkwardly, I don't think anyone would want a card. Surely in those instances the referee is having to judge intent to determine whether to punish the player?

Click to expand...

Murray 17 said:

So you think Mounie's tackle, and Stephen's tackle were dangerous? Obviously you do. I don't.

Click to expand...

Kalimantan Gull said:

OK, so this 'intent' thing... I struggle to see how intent is taken away, both in theory and in practice. Take two stamping incidents of recent vintage, Hemed on the Newcastle player and Barton on Kayal. In bioh cases, if the player intentionally stamped on the guy on the ground, red card all day long. But if he didn't mean it, he just landed awkwardly, I don't think anyone would want a card. Surely in those instances the referee is having to judge intent to determine whether to punish the player?

Click to expand...

Murray 17 said:

So you think Mounie's tackle, and Stephen's tackle were dangerous? Obviously you do. I don't.

Click to expand...

Green Cross Code Man said:

There have been several comments like that on this thread. There are loads of softer reds, sometimes a player goes down and there's been no contact whatsoever. People either have very poor memory or they don't take it in in the first place.

Click to expand...

Ecosse Exile said:

When talking of tackles from days gone by, i always remember Jimmy Case against Ray Wilkins in the 83 cup final, Case clattered into Wilkins so hard that he spun him round 360°, not even a yellow card, today its a straight red and rightly so. Likewise that dirty ******* Norman Whiteside on Chris Ramsey in the replay, would have been a different game if that was a red card.

In my opinion, both Case and Whiteside wouldn't have made those challenges if they had been with todays rules, both could have been career wreckers, sadly for Ramsey it more or less was. My point being that we are better off with the new rules, even if sometimes it seems to be a harsh red card.

Click to expand...

Ecosse Exile said:

When talking of tackles from days gone by, i always remember Jimmy Case against Ray Wilkins in the 83 cup final, Case clattered into Wilkins so hard that he spun him round 360°, not even a yellow card, today its a straight red and rightly so. Likewise that dirty ******* Norman Whiteside on Chris Ramsey in the replay, would have been a different game if that was a red card.

In my opinion, both Case and Whiteside wouldn't have made those challenges if they had been with todays rules, both could have been career wreckers, sadly for Ramsey it more or less was. My point being that we are better off with the new rules, even if sometimes it seems to be a harsh red card.

Click to expand...

Herr Tubthumper said:

I can’t believe this is still rumbling on. It’s clear as day from the laws it’s a red. Two former refs have eloquently and concisely explained why it’s a red. What more is there to discuss?

Click to expand...

TSB said:

How on earth did this stretch to 18 pages?

Studs up challenge, nowhere near the ball and caught Bissouma ABOVE the shin pad?

99/100 times it's a straight red.

Charlie Nicholas is a moron.

Click to expand...

Papa Lazarou said:

That was the first game. Ramsey was still limping when they scored the equaliser and had to be replaced by Gerry Ryan a few minutes later.

The final might have been very different if Ramsey hadn't been crocked, as he was marking Stapleton at the time.

Click to expand...

LamieRobertson said:

Bit of rage and cool


View attachment 102535

Click to expand...